The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1887-11-19

paid from such appropriation as the LeglS-
lature may make, but as the appointment
of this agency is outside the Act, the ex-
penses thus incurred are not payable out
OF the avails of the loan.
Question 4: Gin any case, is the item OF
500, COO in section of the amended Act
intended to be in addition to such per
cent commission ?"
We answer: The item of 100000 APP
propriated for expense of floating loan,
etc., cannot be intended to be in addition
to the per cent commission, first, because
there is no provision elsewhere for the
payment of the per cent. Secondly, be-
cause the phrase negotiating the sale" of
the bonds cannot be considered as any
thing but floating loan. What is the per
cent given for but for negotiating, i. e.,
floating the loan, and that is what the
500 900 is appropriated for, and there is no
other appropriation for anything else of
of the like nature, the balance of the 81
OC0,O 900 being specially appropriated for
other objects The $100,0 is evidently an
estimated sum. for, in the First Act IL was
put at $4,000, presumably because no
commission was to be allowed by the Act
for bonds sold in this Kingdom. More
over the commission being fixed at max
imum of 5 per cent, it was contemplated
that the business might be done for
lower rate.
Question 5. Is any engagementfor bonds
payable in sterling money valid under said
Loan Acts of 1886?
We answer; The bonds must conform to
the terms of the Acts. The whole scope
and intent of these is for bonds to be is
issued by the Hawaiian Government for
certain sum, to wit, 81 600, 900 in U. 5. gold
coin, or its equivalent, in denominations
of not less than 500. 1t is nowhere pro-
ylded in the Act that this is to be loan
designed for the English money market
and to be converted by the Minister of FL
nance into bonds of which the principal
and coupons are to be payable in sterling
money. The bonds are to be issued by the
Minister of Finance, to be sold in this
Kingdom or anywhere else in the world to
whoever may desire to invest money in
such security. The bonds issued under
these Acts certainly are to be all of one
form-a form conforming to the statute in
other respects, and in this that they are
bonds for amounts expressed in dollars
not in pounds for the London market,
francs for the Paris Bourse, or marks for
the German markets. 1t is in our view a
mistaken and unwarrantable impression
that this was a specific English loan.
The Acts specify U. S. gold or its equiv
alent. This must be considered as per-
uniting mode of payment and not var
IS 4I0ok IF ho
Thus, the coupons or bonds may be paid
in such amounts in sovereigns or y. S.
silver as would be equivalent or equal to
the amount expressed in U. S. gold.
Question 6. els the Government respon-
sible for the engagement of its agent to pay
1900 as mentioned in the Minister'S re-
port, provided such engagement was not
authorized by the Loan Acts of 1852"
We adopt as our answer the language of
Judge Story, in his work on Agency"
section 307 A: but in cases of public
agents the Government, or other public
authority is not bound, unless it mani
testify appears that the agent is acting
within the scope of his authority or he is
held out as having authority to do the
act, or IS employed, in his capacity az a
public agent, to make the declaration or
representation for the Government. In
deed, this rule seems indispensable, in
order to guard the public against loss and
injuries arising from the fraud or mistake,
or rashness and indiscretion of their
agents. And their is no hardship in re-
quiring from private persons dealing with
public officers, the duty of inquiry, as to
their real or apparent power and authority
to bind the Government" This principal
is applicable to not merely the financial
agents of the Government, but the Min
listers who gave them the instructions. As
the engagement to pay the Els, 900 in adj
dition to the per cent commission was
unauthorized by the Act of the Legislature,
the country is not bound by it.
Question Z: eff the Court shall say that
the Loan Acts of 1886 do not authorize tire
engagement to pay ELS 600 in addition to
the per cent as commissions earned
therein, would the Government then be
justified in refusing to issue bonds to cover
the Els 600. If it shall also appear that
the Government has contracted for the
payment of such ELS 900 ia addition to the
commissions, and has actually received
the remainder of the money 2"
This is not matter OF law, but a matter
of policy for the Government and the Leg
islature to consider and settle If by
justified" is meant legally bound, we are
not sufficiently informed as to the facts of
the case. Much would depend upon what
acts of ratification, if any, the Government
has done, and also upon the form of the
scrip issued to the general subscribers for
the bonds and by whom issued, and also
who are the holders of the scrip.
Question g. els the form of the bond
herewith submitted authorized by the
Loan Acts of 1886 with its proposed amend
ment? The proposed amendment of the
Acts of 1886 is to.authorize the Minister of
Finance to issue bonds expressed in Lon